Richard Guy Briggs <rgb@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On 2017-02-23 11:57, Paul Moore wrote:
> > On Thu, Feb 23, 2017 at 10:51 AM, Richard Guy Briggs <rgb@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > On 2017-02-23 06:20, Florian Westphal wrote:
> > >> Richard Guy Briggs <rgb@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > >> > Simplify and eliminate flipping in and out of message fields, relying on nfmark
> > >> > the way we do for audit_key.
> > >> >
> > >> > +struct nfpkt_par {
> > >> > + int ipv;
> > >> > + const void *saddr;
> > >> > + const void *daddr;
> > >> > + u8 proto;
> > >> > +};
> > >>
> > >> This is problematic, see below for why.
> > >>
> > >> > -static void audit_ip4(struct audit_buffer *ab, struct sk_buff *skb)
> > >> > +static void audit_ip4(struct audit_buffer *ab, struct sk_buff *skb, struct nfpkt_par *apar)
> > >> > {
> > >> > struct iphdr _iph;
> > >> > const struct iphdr *ih;
> > >> >
> > >> > + apar->ipv = 4;
> > >> > ih = skb_header_pointer(skb, 0, sizeof(_iph), &_iph);
> > >> > - if (!ih) {
> > >> > - audit_log_format(ab, " truncated=1");
> > >> > + if (!ih)
> > >> > return;
> > >>
> > >> Removing this "truncated" has the consequence that this can later log
> > >> "saddr=0.0.0.0 daddr=0.0.0.0" if we return here.
> > >>
> > >> This cannot happen for ip(6)tables because ip stack discards broken l3 headers
> > >> before the netfilter hooks get called, but its possible with NFPROTO_BRIDGE.
> > >>
> > >> Perhaps you will need to change audit_ip4/6 to return "false" when it can't
> > >> get the l3 information now so we only log zero addresses when the packet
> > >> really did contain them.
> > >
> > > Ok, to clarify the implications, are you saying that handing a NULL
> > > pointer to "saddr=%pI4" will print "0.0.0.0" rather than "(none)" or "?"
No, if you pass pointers that would indeed log NULL.
> > My initial reaction is that if the packet is so badly
> > truncated/malformed that we don't have a full IP header than we should
> > just refrain from logging the packet; it's too malformed/garbage to
> > offer any useful information and the normal packet processing should
> > result in the packet being discarded anyway.
True for ip/ipv6, not sure about bridge though.
> Which is why I wanted the ethertype, but that can be coded into the nfmark.
Not following, sorry, are you saying users can/should use -j MARK
somehow?
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netfilter-devel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
